The Single Bench of the Delhi High Court in the case of Saleem vs The State of NCT of Delhi & Anr. consisting of Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani asks the Registry to report on whether impleadment of a victim of sexual offence as a respondent (even if anonymized) in bail applications or criminal appeals was required.
Facts
Petitioner sought regular bail under sections 439 read with 482 CrPC. He was in custody for violations of section 376 IPC and section 4 of the 2012 Protection of Children from Sexual Offenses Act (POCSO Act).
Contentions Made
Upon being queried, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he was specifically asked by the Registry to make the victim/prosecutrix a party-respondent in the matter, which was why respondent No. 2 came to be impleaded as such.
Order
The Registrar (Filing) was asked to advise the court if any court judgment or practice directive required the impleadment of a victim/prosecutrix/informant as a respondent (even if anonymized) in bail applications or criminal appeals pertaining to sexual offences under the IPC and/or the POCSO Act. This question was to be addressed keeping in view that the identity of the victim/prosecutrix was meant to be protected and kept confidential in all such proceedings, and section 439(1-A) of the CrPC and practice directions dated 24.09.2019 given by the Delhi High Court only necessitate that the victim/informant or any authorized person be heard at the time of hearing a bail application for specified offences. It asked for a report by the next date.
The petitioner was told to eliminate respondent No. 2 and produce a revised memo of parties. This suit is listed for January 16, 2023.
Case: Saleem vs The State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.
Citation: BAIL APPLN. 3635/2022 & CRL.M.A. 25427/2022
Bench: Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani
Decided on: 5th December 2022
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
